Well, now the silence has been lifted, though the news isn't good. Not good at all.

The BBC broke to story earlier, barely managing to keep the usual stiff upper lip or hide the tears as they told the world that they will be no price cut for Europe on the PlayStation 3. At all.

Instead, Sony is packaging up a 'Starter Bundle';

"In Europe gamers will get a "starter pack" at an unchanged price of £425 for the 60GB machine, with two games and two controllers included."

So, fair enough... kind of. We get a little bit more bang for our buck, though the amount of buck is utterly unchanged. After all, hardcore gamers will still be able to pick up the 80GB version of the PS3 to fulfill their fanboy needs, won't they?

Nope, they won't - Sony has also announced that they will not be releasing the improved 80GB version of the PS3 in Europe at all either.

Great, thanks Sony. So, all Europe gets is the oldest version of the PS3 which comes packaged with two games and two controllers which will, very soon, be out of date also when the force-feedback SixAxis is introduced.

The ironic thing is that here at bit-tech we finally got ourselves a PS3 for the office and, after some late-night console action, were fairly impressed with the stylish little device. Now, we just hate Sony.

How do you feel about the announcements and Sony's track record? Think Christmas will see better news for Europeans, or are we all doomed to be Nintendo fanboys eternally? Drop your comments below, or in the forums.

You know, Just for a little while I toyed with the idea of getting one. After this "enhancement" to the UK offering forget it. Not only are we screwed over how much we pay, We get screwed on the specs too. At every turn Sony has made PR blunders.
They need their nose to be financially bloodied to get the message i think. ( and It's looking likely)
They seem to only give a darn about the US market. Europe and the UK are some poor cousin.
I'll stick to the Wii60 combo

Lots of things are cheaper in the US, do you not buy a car because they are 50% cheaper over there, do you not buy and LCD/Plasma because they are also cheaper, **** even computer hardware is cheaper that doesn't seem to stop guys on here but hey if its got a Sony label on it, you won't buy it, why is that then? Some very odd people on here obviously missing out on a lot of kit because is cheaper in the US, fools.

Originally Posted by sandysLots of things are cheaper in the US, do you not buy a car because they are 50% cheaper over there, do you not buy and LCD/Plasma because they are also cheaper, **** even computer hardware is cheaper that doesn't seem to stop guys on here but hey if its got a Sony label on it, you won't buy it, why is that then? Some very odd people on here obviously missing out on a lot of kit because is cheaper in the US, fools.

Because, time after time, Sony disregards its European market, focussing completely on Japan and the US. Don't forget that the exchange rate across the world means the PS3 is incredibly expensive over here now, even with the added VAT. At £425 that means the console is the equivalent of over $850 in the US, and even without VAT that's still about $723, which is $124 more expensive than the 80GB version will be in the US.

As for Sony bending us over, remember the fiasco about the PS2 emulation hardware that we didn't get, but the rest of the world didn't? Remember how long we had to wait after the US and Japan when it was released? How about missing out on the 20GB and 80GB version?

I'm betting on a big price-cut over here before Christmas - they're just not selling over here, and at £425 I would still bet on tiny sales at Xmas considering a plentiful supply of Wii's and X360's...

Originally Posted by sandysLots of things are cheaper in the US, do you not buy a car because they are 50% cheaper over there, do you not buy and LCD/Plasma because they are also cheaper, **** even computer hardware is cheaper that doesn't seem to stop guys on here but hey if its got a Sony label on it, you won't buy it, why is that then? Some very odd people on here obviously missing out on a lot of kit because is cheaper in the US, fools.

Its not about it being cheaper, Its about it getting EVEN cheaper.... The US gets a price cut AND and improved spec console. the UK and EU get what? a soon to be infernior model controller and NO HDD upgrade. You can't see the one sidedness of this?

Hang on, its a bit cheeky to say sony are not cutting prices, the cheapest i have found for a ps3 with two games and a second contoller is about £480 to £490 if this is now at £425 thats a £55 cut or a bigger discount than the US was given earlier. Of course your stuck with the games they offer.

Originally Posted by sandysLots of things are cheaper in the US, do you not buy a car because they are 50% cheaper over there, do you not buy and LCD/Plasma because they are also cheaper, **** even computer hardware is cheaper that doesn't seem to stop guys on here but hey if its got a Sony label on it, you won't buy it, why is that then? Some very odd people on here obviously missing out on a lot of kit because is cheaper in the US, fools.

Its because there are enough suckers like you around that Sony can get away with these tricks.

So the rough translation of this is that america get a price cut to clear all 60gb PS3s already in the country. All other old PS3s remaining in circulation after the upgrade will be shipped over to us second rate customers in europe and sold on at full price. Thanks sony Its nice to be made feel like a second rate customer over and over again. This just re-iterates the total lack of respect sony has for europe not only are we paying through the ears for their hardware we are now a dumping ground for all the old stock too. Im even more mad because I desperately want one, the E3 lineup looks superb for it.

I presume that I am the only one here who's tired of this unwarranted hyperventilating every time someone at Sony breaks wind. Bit-Tech used to be a PC hardware enthusiast's site, not a grubby sub-Playstation-magazine bin o' hackery dedicated to nothing more than the near-verbatim regurgitation of Sony press-releases.

Of the twenty news stories currently on the home page, seven are about various Playstations or games exclusively for them, and several more are only of interest if you own an Xbox 360.

Please don't become so successful that you end up indistinguishable from the slippery junk I can pay £6 for in WH Smith.

Originally Posted by Phil RhodesI presume that I am the only one here who's tired of this unwarranted hyperventilating every time someone at Sony breaks wind. Bit-Tech used to be a PC hardware enthusiast's site, not a grubby sub-Playstation-magazine bin o' hackery dedicated to nothing more than the near-verbatim regurgitation of Sony press-releases.

Of the twenty news stories currently on the home page, seven are about various Playstations or games exclusively for them, and several more are only of interest if you own an Xbox 360.

Please don't become so successful that you end up indistinguishable from the slippery junk I can pay £6 for in WH Smith.

Phil

You are reading the news section, not the main articles. They tend to be more in depth and less.... slippery.

As the writer of those stories, I should probably point out that they are time-dependant. It's E3, which means that a LOT of games news is coming out right now and I, as 'the games guy' (official title), have to cover them. Covering them all is impossible, so I choose the cream of the crop. These are, in my opinion, the stories which are of most interest to gamers right now. When 360 news comes along, I cover that. When Wii news comes along, I cover that. When PC news comes along, I cover that.

Unfortunately, theres been very little PC content shown at E3 which isn't swamped over by console releases. This obviously dictates what content I can find, which we compensate for with main features which are ussually exclusively focused at E3.

I agree Sony is massive in the news here right now, but the reason for that is simple: Its E3 and Sony is massively in the news everywhere.

Don't worry, I have no wish to end up like PS2 official or anything of the sort. If I had a dream for the game coverage of bit-tech it would simply be to give it an equal audience to the hardware side of things; an open, rational and knowedgeable crowd of readers who can reasonably discuss their passion and love of games. Everyday when I come to work my head is buzzing with ideas of how to make this happen and I can promise without exageration or lie that making bit-tech a hub of PC based games news, features and review is the single largest concern of mine on a daily basis.

Of course, to do this I need help from readers occasionally, so as always feel free to email me at joe.martin@bit-tech.net and give me your feedback, tips and ideas. Together we can make the games coverage here something to be even more proud of.

I still think it's underpriced for what it offers. If anyone wants to contest, then ask Sony to release a bare system to satisfy you with just the basic essentials to play games. Otherwise, it's perfectly priced.

Originally Posted by kempezIt isn't perfectly priced. If it was perfectly priced then it would be selling by the bucket-load.

For the average gamer the PS3 costs too much.

Which is precisely what I said. If you guys want to buy it to only play games, then demand a version that does only that: 1 or 2 controller ports, game-only disc drive, no USB, no card reader, no storage, no optical out, bare power supply, no game or wiring bundle, no online Sony store or downloads, very basic online gaming support, cheap ABS plastic shell, etc.

What you guys are demanding from Sony is a PS3 that only plays games the way the Nintendo 64 did. Otherwise, (sorry I have to say this, mates) shut up and embrace the reality that game consoles no longer take only game discs up their slot. Alright, you guys have an authentic argument in that it is expensive for gamers, but you are not paying for gaming alone. Buy the crude equivalent of what the Playstation 3 offers and come back to me with a receipt.

@Amon: I think you're totally missing the point. The point is Sony is alienating their customers by dropping the price in the US and Japan and not in Europe. As I said if the price dropped in Europe I would buy one (and tbh not for the cr@p games it has on it atm). I couldn't give a rats ass how much Sony pay for it hardware wise, if they want to sell the damned thing they have to drop the price and give Europe and the rest of the world equal billing. Let's face it: if you wanted just a games system you wouldn't bother buying the PS3 right now as there's basically nothing worth playing

Originally Posted by kempezIt isn't perfectly priced. If it was perfectly priced then it would be selling by the bucket-load.

For the average gamer the PS3 costs too much.

Which is precisely what I said. If you guys want to buy it to only play games, then demand a version that does only that: 1 or 2 controller ports, game-only disc drive, no USB, no card reader, no storage, no optical out, bare power supply, no game or wiring bundle, no online Sony store or downloads, very basic online gaming support, cheap ABS plastic shell, etc.

What you guys are demanding from Sony is a PS3 that only plays games the way the Nintendo 64 did. Otherwise, (sorry I have to say this, mates) shut up and embrace the reality that game consoles no longer take only game discs up their slot. Alright, you guys have an authentic argument in that it is expensive for gamers, but you are not paying for gaming alone. Buy the crude equivalent of what the Playstation 3 offers and come back to me with a receipt.

No one here is arguing that the PS3 doesn't need those things... (I don't think anyway.. I'm not, and that's all that matters) We're just saying that the very very simple fact is that not many people are willing to or used to spending £400 for a games console. I know, its not just a games console any more. Its pretty much a media PC. But they still use the playstation name and they still market it primarily for games. So all people see is £400 games console. People that know different are people such as ourselves that hang around on the internets and the majority of us are clued up enough to know that a PC does most of those things, and we've already got one of those.

In all that I've failed to insert a sarky ultra obvious, panty bunching comment so I'll just call you a numpty instead.

Originally Posted by AmonWhich is precisely what I said. If you guys want to buy it to only play games, then demand a version that does only that: 1 or 2 controller ports, game-only disc drive, no USB, no card reader, no storage, no optical out, bare power supply, no game or wiring bundle, no online Sony store or downloads, very basic online gaming support, cheap ABS plastic shell, etc.

What you guys are demanding from Sony is a PS3 that only plays games the way the Nintendo 64 did. Otherwise, (sorry I have to say this, mates) shut up and embrace the reality that game consoles no longer take only game discs up their slot. Alright, you guys have an authentic argument in that it is expensive for gamers, but you are not paying for gaming alone. Buy the crude equivalent of what the Playstation 3 offers and come back to me with a receipt.

Then they need to stop marketting it as a games console and more as a media center. They can start by changing the name and making the PLAYstation a system for gamers, which is what it originally was and was billed to be.

I think most people on the bottom line will agree that the PS3 (hardware wise) is good value for money - check the price of the 8800GTXs at the end of Tim's article today.

I also think that most people will agree that the current games console market has 3 pricing tiers and you pick the one you want (or can afford).

Wii on the lower end, based in game play.
360 in the middle for good graphics an a host of games at the moment.
The PS3 for the most power and a possible future of great games (I know, I know the 360 has a better GPU, but then there's the blueray... symantics really...)

The major point and what is ruffling the tails of people in Europe is that Sony are not treating each economic area fairly. The price to me is fine (although I'm personally not willing to spend that much on a console), but the price must be the same everywhere. The hardware is great, but again, this must be the same everywhere. Waiting awhile for a release is ok, but please make it the same everywhere. This way nobody feels as if they're being taken for a ride and judgements on whether the cost is worthwhile can be made later.

(and by the same everywhere... I understand the UK pays more and exchange rates etc. - I mean a reasonable difference. I also understand the difficulties in universal release dates - but make it weeks not months and all will be smiling)

We don't want it to just play games, we'd like to be able to download demos and stuff like the 360, but the BR player was unnecessary and doesn't improve it as a gaming console, all it does is make the console more expensive and gives Sony a way to use it's Playstation customers to push their BR format to victory.

Originally Posted by Phil RhodesPlaystation 3 costs more money than a PC of equivalent performance. QED.

I think thats pushing it a little, but it's not too much more nowerdays to get a PC that's roughly the same power as a PS3. The only problem is a console can do a lot more with it's hardware than a PC can since a PS3 game is tailored for it's hardware, whereas a PC game has to to compatible with many different types. A console also doesn't have a massive OS running in the background.

Come on anyone who pays that much is a muppet but even so at least you can take it home and be sure it will run, not requires 3 patches, a new driver and what ever else it might take to get it running, most PS3 games are <£33 from a number of online stores.

I do agree that PC games are priced much better and over the course of ownership the PC could probably end up cheaper, if it wasn't for the fact you'd need an upgrade of some description in 12-18months just to support the latest game engines etc, it might just be true.

When I read the article about the 60GB model getting killed off the first thing that came to mind was "I bet there's gonna be another price drop soon" Interesting that there's a link to just that in this article.

Ok, so what is the big deal guys? You are getting an extra controller AND 2 AAA titles that kick major ass for the same price as what it was before. I mean, let's think....you buy the console for $100 cheaper, then you go out and buy a controller for Multi-player and then you gotta buy some games (which are more than likely gonna be those two titles considering there are THAT many good titles to choose from yet), so what are you guys fussing about? For all you guys know, the PS3's gonna drop by another good margin before Xmas (which is when you ACTUALLY buy it once more games come out) because whatever happens in USA should more than likely coincide a few months later in the EU/UK. Lastly, I don't understand what the 80GB PS3 offers over the 60GB Bundle other than 20GB of more space.....so please fill me in on what the big fuss is because in actuality the price is very competitive.....

Originally Posted by kempezlol I love the way "the price is very competitive".....competitive with what? Xbox 360 Premium for £229 or a PS3 for £400?? As has been said - I could get a pretty damn nice gaming PC for that tbh

I'm not a fan of Sony, but then nor am I a fan of Microsoft (or anyone for that matter), but surely that doesn't add up?

Dude whatever....go buy that sub-par thing you call a "gaming computer" for the same amount of money because it'll be out-of-date by the time you can say "holy crap! what an ignorant mistake THAT was!". Honestly, people with your mentality don't deserve a sweet piece of kit like the PS3, but it makes sense because you probably can't utilize the PS3 to its full potential, so it makes sense you hate it.....honestly just wait for the price to drop by Xmas (and for more games to come out and for Playstation Home) and stop freaking out because it's too high right now....I mean if anything is out of your budget you SHOULD wait until it fits it instead of expecting it to fit it up-front....so...honestly I can only say wait or just go out and buy a 2-year old 360 like everyone else I guess and hope it doesn't give you any troubles.....

P.S. kempez, please prove to me what you could buy with the same amount of money you could get the PS3 bundle for, because I'm seriously anticipating this list of components....

O yeah!, Joe, why didn't you have the article read, "Sony keeps PS3 price the same in EU, but now including a bundle"...?, but instead you made it seem as if they just completely disregarded the EU and didn't add anything....? I understand you put it in the article itself, but still.......

As to the bundle, I think what annoys people is probably that they are making out they are adding a lot of value to it instead of a price cut, but that only holds true if you would have bought both games and another controller in the first place, if you didn't you are left effectively paying more for less choice.

Give it a few months and i'm sure copies of both games will be flooding ebay because of it, as people try and claw back the cash (but probably fail because you won't be able to buy the console without them anyway..)

Myself I guess if I was buying one I'd want the second controller, definetely not motorstorm because I'm not into driving games and resistance would be a harder decision - I have yet to see anything much past a 70%/average review for it and it seems like the PC isn't exactly lacking in those already.

~£450 will get you a reasonable pc if your building your self and even if you spend 200 quid more whats that 20 games over 5 years and you've made a massive saving. Seems like a much better deal to me. And lets face it the cost of games is a biggy cause none of us want to anger the god Sony and pirate games do we now! Coupled with the fact that in five years your "sweet piece of kit" will be an out of date paper weight with an obsolete optical drive its suddenly not such a great deal is it.

psx 11 years, ps2 is at 7 years and its not ready to stop, unlike MS and Nintendo Sony have not abandoned a home console yet so why do you think its going to be obsolete in 5 yrs, the PS2 has seen some quality titles this year and Sony plus 3rd partys still have a load to come out over the next couple of years as the console still sells well.

Whatever PC you build for £450 won't last a fifth of the lifespan of the PS3 and lets be honest probably won't last out the current PS2, the next big PC title will come out and it will no doubt croak or require compromised gameplay.

Because much like trying to play as PS2 two years ago the graphics are crap and the game play stilted. Unlike your pc where even if the games are still **** you can make them look more pretty. A console only has a year or two at the most before graphics, and usually gameplay, leave them standing.

And to be honest i have a £300 4 yr old pc i still use every day, much more than i used my £300 PS2.

Perhaps not £400 for that resolution, but between £600 and £800 (which is still a saving with few games per year and a virtually unlimited back cataloge) I'm not trying to be a fan boy for either side PC/Consoles have their respective places and for one the PC place is not at 1920x1080 but more like 1280 x 800 But is stand by the fact that in 5 years any given console will be much like your PS2 an obsolete paper weight unlike that SKTA pc which is still a pretty decent box for doing any thing even low end gaming.

Actually a nice gaming pc can be made for around that price. Recently my sister got a core2 duo setup from dell for around 300 pounds found here. Sold the nice 19 inch monitor that came with it for 70. Just saw an 8800 gts in the bargain section here for 170. Thats just over 400 for a a dual core PC with a 8800gts.

OMG...wtf are you all getting so het up about?
YES, Sony are being lame when it comes to EU pricing etc. Slapped wrists for them, but we're surely used to being shafted in this way by now?
Though the PS3 is WAAAY out of my price range at the mo, I'm not sure it's necessarily overpriced, as such:

So... I bought my original PS2 when it first came out, and paid about £330 with some DVDs, a cheap 2nd controller and a game. This is when DVD players themselves cost about £200-£250, so it seemed like a fair enough deal at the time.
As a reference point, I also bought a new 28" TV for £280 at the time, so the freakin' PS2 cost more than the TV!

A PS3 costs £399 now, with 2 official controllers and 2 games.
Obviously, to take full advantage of it, a 1080p TV is required. (Only a complete moron would buy it for use on an SD TV)
- That'll be another £800 investment then!

Basically, it's the cutting edge. Who the hell expects reasonable prices for the latest, most powerful stuff?
- If you can afford a decent HiDef LCD/Plasma TV, then why complain about paying half that again for a PS3 (or whatever) that can actually make good use of that screen?

- Just how much is the cutting edge of PC graphics at the mo?
An 8800 Ultra is like £350 for a graphics card. That's what I call unreasonable, ffs.

Things have moved on. Your Goodmans CRT TV no longer cuts it.
Three choices:
1> Coerce Mummy and Daddy into buying you the latest HDTV and PS3
2> Save up for it
3> Resign yourself to waiting for a price drop that won't come for another year, because you're too skint at the mo. (like me)

Originally Posted by DXR_13KEa challenge!!!! i think i will take it as soon as i have time.... maybe tomorrow.... any rules? can i get parts from other countries? FPS lower limit? OS?

The rules are simple.

It must be capable of playing games but does not require a screen.

If I cannot play a game exactly the same on a PS3 and this PC then it is not fit for purpose. An OS must be used which can produce effects the same way legally (i.e. if the effects require DX10 then an operating system which can use DX10 officially must be used).

It must allow me to use it for other uses as well (like the PS3), have bluetooth, a memory card reader, a blu-ray or HD-DVD drive and wireless.

Input method is optional (i.e. keyboard and mouse are acceptable).

As for the price, in the UK the console has been £400 on it's own for a while, I've seen it at £425 but that's with a game and accessories.

You can go over budget, but (for people that say PCs are cheaper because they are upgradeable) you must take into account the cost of upgrading a PC after 10 years.

The price cuts will eventually hit these shores. Until then I don't think there will be any significant effect on sales. People who want a PS3 will still buy it. People who think about specs and compare price drops to US are in the minority.

Why is it that Sony keeps on making such horrible business decisions? It sucks that Europeans are being shafted. Where's the fairness in that? Is their ego so big that they're too blind to see the distrust made with potential customers? How can people buy from a company that gives them the short end of the stick? So much lost profit. Unfortunately this is a loss on both ends. Hope you guys get compensated in some way for Sony's ludicrous antics.

Consoles require a smaller initial outlay, but if you buy a lot of games PC's wind up evenly priced or cheaper :

Taking Play.com for an example, its a rare PC game that launches at more than £24.99, while mid-range games often launch at £17.99 and they drop reasonably quickly (a lot of AAA games can be picked up for £9.99 or £14.99 within 6-9 months or so). Meanwhile 360 and PS3 games for the most part are costing £39.99, with the cheapest ones mostly launching at £29.99 and they aren't dropping much/at all. Wii ones sit somewhere in the middle at £34.99 - £24.99.

So, a PC compared to a 360/PS3, buying one new game per month for 3 years, saves £540 (£792 for mid-range games), giving us a PC budget or more like £750-£950 (£1,000-£1,250 for mid-range games).

If the PC user can stand to wait a little buying the games instead of rushing right out, can basically double that and anyone who buys games at a greater rate will save more, of course if you only buy a couple games a year, the console is hard to beat, but still I'm not sure you'd want to spend £400 if you only want to play a couple games ?

Originally Posted by DXR_13KEa challenge!!!! i think i will take it as soon as i have time.... maybe tomorrow.... any rules? can i get parts from other countries? FPS lower limit? OS?

And you don't have to include a big or fast hard drive, no screen, hardly any cables, but for good measure you should probably invest in a bluetooth keyboard and mouse. But if you can, get one without any trimmings.. Literally the basic model with no extras at all.

Microsoft 360 is the better of the 2 next gen, I have had red ring and laser failure on 2 consoles in 6 months, but the 3 year warranty makes all this seem ok somewhat..... The Wii looks like a better buy for a second machine in this instance....

If sony really think this is the way to treat the whole of europe then they are more stupid than I thought, firstly we wait too long for it to arrive on our shores, then we get a highly priced piece of kit with blue ray, when over the pond they are getting it for less even before the price cuts, then this we get to be the idiots (not me) who take the stock of crap controllers in bundles, while the american or japanese will be annouced a new better controller, along with a couple of the first batch of games (which to add insult will have NOT FOR RESALE on em I bet)....

I remember microsoft did this to me with the original xbox console, I payed £299 on release day, and insultingly a week later it dropped £100, and microsoft gave me a god afwul second duke (the worlds worst controller), and 2 microsoft studio games, I had bought PGR, and Halo at the time of console and was left with crap choices....

Originally Posted by DougEdeyOne thing I didn't realise is that there hasn't been an official price drop on the 360 for over 600 days. Sony did 150 days~ I think, PS2 was 525 days.

No official price drop but places like boots like to sell the premo for £230 and the core fro £150 :)

Why dont we talk about MS f**king us and screwing us all over with games for windows forgeting people are still using XP. Means my 2 year old machine that cost £1,300 wont be able to play any new PC games and I have not bought any games on PC since HL2, DOOM 3, BF2, 2143. Games I want to play now are Games for windows which means I got to spend crap loads more money on a new PC and OS.

£280 for my 360 and I dont have to worry about upgrading or seeing a preview of new games out in the next year and dont even need to think or worry about if it will work. Same goes for the PS3, when I get one I know all games for it will work and will not cost me more money.

Therefore I see it value for Money.

Im married and can no longer spend hundreds of £'s on upgrading my PC to keep it Elite so that I can play the latest games. Now my gaming days are almost over for PC as I have new prioritys and responsibilities.

Console is now for me, like back in the good old days before I started working and buying my first PC. Cheaper to buy a £400 Console that has a 10 year life span than a £1K PC that has 1-2 years.

Originally Posted by devdevil85Dude whatever....go buy that sub-par thing you call a "gaming computer" for the same amount of money because it'll be out-of-date by the time you can say "holy crap! what an ignorant mistake THAT was!". Honestly, people with your mentality don't deserve a sweet piece of kit like the PS3, but it makes sense because you probably can't utilize the PS3 to its full potential, so it makes sense you hate it.....honestly just wait for the price to drop by Xmas (and for more games to come out and for Playstation Home) and stop freaking out because it's too high right now....I mean if anything is out of your budget you SHOULD wait until it fits it instead of expecting it to fit it up-front....so...honestly I can only say wait or just go out and buy a 2-year old 360 like everyone else I guess and hope it doesn't give you any troubles.....

wow so I make a simple statement and ur all over me like a rash...hmm yes. Seeing as I can "take advantage of a PS3" as you put it that point just comes down to a personal insult, not that it surprises me of course. When it comes to consoles people do seem to get very upset if their favourite isn't someone else's cup of tea.

I have a gaming computer right now (well 2 actually) and it can definitely out-perform the PS3 in pretty much every department. Granted it didn't cost £400, but then hell it didn't cost me anything at all so....

I also did not say it was out of my budget, just that it is more than I reasonably expect to pay for either a console OR a high-def media player - and I will wait until the price comes down (and of course a game I actually want to play on it comes out) before even thinking about buying a PS3. I actually bought a 360 at release and yep it broke...then MS replaced it (FOC) and it's been fine since. So let's recap - I've been playing on my 360 for well over a year and a half and bought it at a cheaper price than the PS3 is now. I think the 360 is decent but if some games come out I actually want to play I am not discounting the PS3 won't also be a great console.

Quote:

Originally Posted by devdevil85P.S. kempez, please prove to me what you could buy with the same amount of money you could get the PS3 bundle for, because I'm seriously anticipating this list of components....

Well I'm glad to hear it :) aside from the Blu-Ray drive you can get a PC that plays games at 1280 x 1024 with some AA and good numbers for around £400, and you'll also be able to edit your photo's, have full use of downloading/web facilities from all websites, run pretty much any application/program you like, play the huge catalogue of PC games and do much more...which is a lot of value for money for your average person and gamer :) Hell just hit up www.dell.co.uk

Anyway in sum: the PS3 is a nice bit of kit, just over-priced right now and Sony have the worst marketing department in the entire world

The Price for a PS3 over here in Australia is around the $1000 mark it's huge and that's despite our currency that is actually doing well (for us that is) at 0.85 cents for a USD (or is it 0.75 cents...), anyway our prices arent being dropped either. I looked and read about the PS3 when the first words came out, and how good it was going to be... yada yada yada... but then $1000 came along and smashed my dream of putting down the Nintendo and become a Sony kid (Game Cube... well sucked to round it up). Anyway Sony are trying to become a premium brand in a Mid priced market, guess what Sony IT'S NOT WORKING even when you have the PSP that has awesome features with the PS3 you arent getting enough sales.

If Sony wants to make money, then they either drop prices and sell games OR do something about it, I mean look at the 360 your able to play with your PC friends, what have Sony done? Come on Sony if you want to not be known for a high priced System that didn't get enough sales to make a Sequel... then you know... listen!!

Enough at the criticism, tbh I love the PC and would rather spend more money on it than a console that has 1 or 2 exclusives when PC has about 100.

If the price doesn't drop by next year, the PSwii isn't going to work.

Originally Posted by kempezWell I'm glad to hear it :) aside from the Blu-Ray drive you can get a PC that plays games at 1280 x 1024 with some AA and good numbers for around ?400, and you'll also be able to edit your photo's, have full use of downloading/web facilities from all websites, run pretty much any application/program you like, play the huge catalogue of PC games and do much more...which is a lot of value for money for your average person and gamer :) Hell just hit up www.dell.co.uk

Anyway in sum: the PS3 is a nice bit of kit, just over-priced right now and Sony have the worst marketing department in the entire world

First off, sorry I came across as rash, but so did you.... Also, you didn't list off any components with their respected prices...either way it doesn't matter because what you said about the computer doing all the photo editing and surfing the web, etc. is really irrelevant to the argument. The argument was about gaming/performance, not overall usability. And Yes a $700 Dell computer right now can (probably) play Current-gen games at 1280X1024, that is true, but what about Next-gen DX10? Secondly, you don't just buy a computer to play current games at the max settings, you buy a computer to future-proof yourself for playing games for the next 2-3 years, but even at 1280X1024 that rig is still not as good as PS3's 1366X768 or 1920X1080.

Also, regarding your statement about how a PC offers the user the ability to "edit your photo's, have full use of downloading/web facilities from all websites, run pretty much any application/program you like, play the huge catalogue of PC games and do much more...", you can run Linux on the PS3 which will allow you to do all of this AND with a mouse and keyboard, so what does a computer offer that a PS3 doesn't in terms of usability on that stage?, but tbh I do not own a PS3, I have not installed Linux on it, and I have not tried using the operating system or have I tried editing photos or listened to music, etc., so I can't tell you if the experience would anywhere close to the same as it would be on a PC.

I also agree that Sony's PS3 marketing team ****ed up their marketing on the console and that it is biting them in the butt and also that more original games need to debut before the PS3 worth the money as a gaming console

You should bear in mind when considering PS3 for PC usage that it is pretty limited, you get 200Mb RAM to use and you don't have access to the RSX, so HD video playback etc just isn't happening, you can liken it to a wank laptop, suitable for web/email and office stuff but much else is probably beyond its scope. For a lot of people what it can do would be plenty, my brother for example only wants a PC for games and downloading music etc from the web, for his money he is better off with a PS3, I know how to build cheap PCs and I know what they cost and how long they typically last, he is not in a position to keep up and I don't want the phone calls when a game doesn't work etc. :D PS3 is perfect for him, of course explaining Linux to someone who barely understands Windows was another challenge

Originally Posted by devdevil85but tbh I do not own a PS3, I have not installed Linux on it, and I have not tried using the operating system or have I tried editing photos or listened to music, etc., so I can't tell you if the experience would anywhere close to the same as it would be on a PC.
[/I]

Originally Posted by LeMaltorYou made the PS3 sound so good up until you said that lol :p

Sadly I can only assume. It's not right for me to say something as if it's fact, but I would only WISH that I could do the same on a PS3 as I could my 2-3 year old computer.....but I guess I can't but o well, it doesn't matter since (again) I already own a decent PC for all of the "other stuff". The only thing that matters to me right now is upcoming gaming (whether I'm gonna go with the PS3 after Xmas or with a PC for DX10 games, idk, games will be the deciding factor, not "everything else" and of course price, too but I'll weigh that in later...)

Originally Posted by devdevil85I also agree that Sony's PS3 marketing team ****ed up their marketing on the console and that it is biting them in the butt and also that more original games need to debut before the PS3 worth the money as a gaming console

Although I'm glad that you don't baselessly knock on the Playstation 3, I highly doubt their marketing team is to blame, especially for high retail costs or the resulting poor sales. They marketed the home console decently--maybe not enough as I hardly came across any promotions in person--and it was priced perfectly fair as far as the multi-billion dollar investment in the Cell Broadband Engine is concerned. It was the consumer's expectations that were far too high and the failure of delivery on the developers' part.
A breakdown of the cause-effect relationship Sony has had with their Playstation 3:

None of the promised titles were anywhere to be found upon release; cause: all of the involved developers and publishers who strictly prioritized presenting us with distantly future titles at conventions--did you ever hear about Killzone 2 or Final Fantasy VII since then?

Blu-ray Disc (alongside its competitor) was having difficulties in establishing itself as a popular format; cause: we, the consumers, could not make up our minds and still can't

Sony's online Playstation Network was effectively functionless due to the above two shortcomings; cause: feature titles were pushed back indefinitely

games that were available at the release date were generally poorly developed and too few; cause: developers did not commit to their projects and Sony's engineers did not create a satisfactory developer's kit

the console was delayed far too long to remain in the competitive bracket wherein the Xbox 360 stood, forcing the Playstation 3 to seat itself in a higher-end niche at launch--though this has changed over the past year; cause: IBM et al could not finalize the consumer version of the Cell in time

The console's computing power was ultimately left unused for the most part. Recall the endless barrage of trailers and 'tech demos' immediately preceding the system's launch. There were the occasional realistic production titles at E3, but the main attraction was the Cell Broadband Engine--which performed flawlessly--but that did not accomplish anything with respect to achievable launch titles. In hindsight, Sony's only marketing slip-up that I can conjure is their lack of promotional material... and promoting all of the wrong things in their vague press releases--Cell's power does not immediately translate into malleable video game satisfaction. It was a cascade of failure from just about every other source out there connected upon which the Playstation 3 relied that resulted in an abysmal first breath and continuing struggle.

Holy crap, you write as if I was reading from a LORD novel; perfect grammar, no mis-spellings. Tbh I love it! Anyways, I should've zoned-in on what I thought they messed up at. What I feel Sony's Marketing has failed to explain about the PS3 to the consumer IS: What the PS3 offered/offers over the competition because people only see it as an expensive/polished 360 with a brother-to-HDDVD media drive. It's amazing how much is involved with producing a console, let alone what it takes to launch one, so I understand why the PS3's path so far has been rocky, but they are making up for it, and this Xmas will really be the deciding factor on whether the console is what consumers want or whether it's a failing/overly expensive console, because of course to a niche market the console is a great value, but to the average consumer it may be over-priced and with no games it's probably just plain not worth it (especially in the UK/EU). Either way, I love the console and if good games debut I will have a reason to buy it; not only because it would have good games, but also decent-to-great BC on some of my PS1/friend's PS2 games, it can upscale my library of DVDs to 1080i, I won't have to drag a cord 800 feet from our modem to our basement (of couse the 360 can do it, but you gotta spend another $60), rumble should be back, and I might just be able to pick up a used 60GB for $350, but of course I'm just hoping), as for the 360 my best friend already owns one and he will be getting any games I myself would want, so I don't see a reason to buy it. ok enough rambling

devdevil85:
Hehe glad to hear I just hate typing on this crappy IBM keyboard because the key size and layout is much different that what I use at home; so my typed words per minuted is honestly 10. :( I keep messing up every single word!

Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.